Anyone who wants to work or volunteer with children could see their careers
ruined on the grounds that they have no friends or a complicated private
life.

The Government’s new anti-paedophile database will take into account lifestyles, relationships and beliefs when assessing the backgrounds of more than 11million people, rather than just whether they have a criminal record.

The Independent Safeguarding Authority can consider unproven allegations made in newspaper reports or tip-offs from members of the public, as well as trawling internet chatrooms and websites such as Facebook for evidence to use against applicants.

From next month, some employers will be under a legal duty to pass on information if they think a member of staff poses a risk.

Anyone judged to be a danger is banned from working with children, the elderly or homeless people in any capacity.

Josie Appleton, the convenor of the Manifesto Club, a civil liberties group that is leading opposition to the vetting scheme, said: “It is clear that these procedures will further erode people’s privacy and civil liberties – and increase the likelihood of innocent people losing their job because ‘on the face of it’ somebody thought they did something.”

Related Articles

The ISA is being developed as a way to prevent a repeat of the Soham murders, by ensuring anyone who can build up a relationship of trust with young or vulnerable people is vetted before they begin work.

An estimated 11.3m people will have to register after it goes live in a year’s time, with most paying £64 to do so.

Concerns are growing about the scope of the scheme, its potential effect on volunteer numbers and the relationship between adults and children.

Leading authors including Philip Pullman have criticised the fact that they will have to register before they can visit schools, while Sir Michael Bichard, who carried out the Soham inquiry, has said some parts of the plan “need to be looked at again”.

It had been widely assumed that the ISA’s 200 case workers would make their decisions based solely on objective criteria such as whether applicants had relevant criminal convictions or professional misconduct findings against their names.

But official guidance discloses that subjective opinions about an individual’s beliefs or personal life could also be used to end their careers in education, health care or sport, if there are concerns about their conduct.

ISA officials are entitled to consider “information” received from former employers, professional bodies, members of the public or “stories in the press”.

If an applicant is suspected of harming a child, the case worker only needs to decide “whether it is ‘more likely than not’” that the alleged event occurred to consider barring them.

Even if they had been found not guilty of a crime in court, the guidance points out that the ISA’s standard of proof is lower and so “must still consider the case for itself”.

They are also told that “evidence not specifically relating to any particular event” can be considered relevant if it leads to the suspicion that an applicant may harm someone.

Case workers must then work out “risk factors linked to future harm” based on an individual’s interests, attitudes, relationships and lifestyle, under the ISA’s Structured Judgement Process.

These include, in addition to an obsession with sex or violence, “presence of severe emotional loneliness and/or the inability to manage/sustain emotionally intimate relationships with age-appropriate adults”.

Other supposed risk factors include “links with anti-social peers”, “presence of impulsive, chaotic, unstable lifestyle” or "using substances or sex to cope with stress".

If an applicant raises “definite concerns” in two or more areas the expectation is that they will be barred, although they have eight weeks in which to contest the decision.

The Home Office confirmed that case workers will be allowed to “undertake appropriate research” on “internet chatrooms or social networking websites” if they think they may contain relevant information on an applicant.

However a spokesman insisted the ISA would have to believe an applicant had harmed or may harm a child before they would start looking into his private life.

He said: “All relevant factors would be assessed to establish if there might be a potential risk of harm. The ISA will rely on the information that is provided by the referring organisation or individual.

“Of course such factors are only assessed if the caseworker has established that ‘relevant conduct’ or risk of harm has taken place – stages one and two of the decision making process must be satisfied before any of the risk factors are assessed.”

As of October 12, education and health bodies, councils, employment agencies and professional bodies are legally required to tell the ISA if they have sacked someone for harming a child or vulnerable adult. They must also report someone if they are “concerned about the behaviour or conduct”.